Wright v. Lewis et al
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 2/17/21 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders, and for failure to comply with the court's local rules. The Clerk of Court be directed to close the case. Objections to F&R due within fourteen days. (Kaminski, H)
Case 2:17-cv-00260-KJM-JDP Document 66 Filed 02/17/21 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DANIEL WEBSTER WRIGHT,
J. LEWIS, et al.,
Case No. 2:17-cv-00260-KJM-JDP (PC)
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT THIS ACTION BE DISMISSED FOR
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE, FAILURE TO
COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS, AND
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH LOCAL
OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN
On November 10, 2020, defendants filed a motion for terminating sanctions pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b)(2)(A). ECF No. 61. In violation of Local Rule 230(l),
plaintiff failed to timely file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion.
Accordingly, on December 18, 2020, plaintiff was ordered to show cause within twenty-one days
why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply with the
court’s local rules. ECF No. 65. He was also ordered to file, within twenty-one days, a response
to defendants’ motion to defendants’ motion. Id. at 2. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply
with the court’s order would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Id. To
Case 2:17-cv-00260-KJM-JDP Document 66 Filed 02/17/21 Page 2 of 2
date, plaintiff has not filed an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion,
nor otherwise responded to the court’s December 18, 2020 order.
Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that:
1. This action be dismissed for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders,
and for failure to comply with the court’s local rules. See ECF No. 65.
2. The Clerk of Court be directed to close the case.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days
after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written
objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned
“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the
objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The
parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to
appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez
v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
February 17, 2021
JEREMY D. PETERSON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?